Welcome to the commentary magazine. Podcast today is Monday, genuine skills, July second, twenty eighteen, I think, I was hoping it was January, because I, because women living through the horrendous he wave. I hear Chicago as where I am as in New York with my colleagues, I'm John, towards the editor of commentary, my colleagues being, of course, senior a green while high Abe Ajar aim just to give you a sense of how hot

was in New York this weekend. Abe sad inside and watched Ingmar Bergmans movie about the plague lacked at San feel. Tat was the way commemorated to refresh forever at nice a refreshing bath and the plague say, as some of you go like into a pool with its hard, a watches, Ingmar Bergmann movies, about the black death, also with us New York's arm Amari senior writer high Sakharov Hydra what he did he will. He went to see hereditary scared, the but Jesus Adam himself. Well, we're very excited. I can't see a cause, it's scary. At long last year I had em a fit of hysterical laughter from pension, and I mean I'm telling you this is this scary movie in a generation. Ok, so that's a good way to keep me for think of an nor Rossman R R associate editor.

No, it has too little kids There is a man sure were they splashing and up and up and up kitty poor. We had a cable who didn't busted out this weekend. As a new set of parent friends who have a real and we He is now excellent, excellent use of the parent friend very important, well. I don't know what we did. We went to museums in Chicago in the leg of discovery centre and we build lesbos in general, tried to steer the heat? So I guess that's now. We ve now had are very important heat com rotation and we can now dispense with the heat conversation. I can tell you the commentaries. The seventy seven year old, monthly of intellectual analysis, political probity in cultural criticism from a conservative perspective join us. A common a magazine, dot com, where we give you a few free weeds, ask it to subscribe. Ninety magnify four digit

subscription Twentyman? Ninety five for an all access subscription, including our beauty, monthly magazine your mailbox eleven times a year go to Itunes. If Europe listener to this. Please leave a review. We helps go to stick. Go to wherever people get podcast send the end and enjoy. Oh, it is very hard for a Conservative who lived through, let's say, thee, the horrible character assassination, Robert Bork nineteen. Eighty seven and the various relations of the treaty, of conservative legal intellectuals, and conserve legal and selection by the main stream, media and by liberals across Europe, deeds and not to be enjoying immensely the total psychotic meltdown of of liberals and the left in the wake of the wreck of the retired.

Of justice Kennedy joined us in court packing, as is gonna, be the that's the way for the future. I hope that we spend years talking. That court back- and that is my dream- is to have every same and long discredited, left wing, idea about how to control the federal government and keep concern Is that a power that every single one of those now being fund and centre as a debating point They policy issue so that the so that basically concerns. Dance on on liberal grave. I mean, I don't know how to look at this occurrence, mostly conservative justice, despite all of our very deep problems with Anthony Cannon His jurisprudence, but, generally speaking, a conservative o justice that voted on the conservative side is

tiring under a conservative president or a republican president and will be replaced by some. Somewhat like minded. Therefore not share during the biological balance of the court, and even this fact, this one fact today a right, that a right of centre justice will be replaced by right of Sir Justice is causing the left to act as though their future there, his, thereby their entire grasp on power in the United States, is now being destroyed right. It's it's like they're, there being re traumatized You know concerning the presidential election, it's another deliver ray of news that everything is not going to continually then towards their with their whim. I think that we are talking of history is not bad for them, so you say yes,

Look I to give the left some credit, not credit, but to unsuited to suggest why I think some of them Freaking out, is not entirely sort of unmerited certain psychotic them. Much of it surely is, is John said that that Kennedy on I would describe Chemic Kennedy, as are one of our most libertarian justices. In other words, he had had a a vision, of individual liberty. That is very expensive that that reaches back to the car, a decision in Griswold, which it struck down restrictions on artificial country, corruption in the sixties. All the weight today with this very kind of expansive vision that there is the constitution protect

privacy and dignity in a very expensive way, and I think that it's not entirely crazy for the left, a freak out if a job, he's dead dead replaces Kennedy is more, let's say in the more mould. Of course, such a leader and others who take an hour in view of what the privacy right really means that could, really. I mean in other words and whether or not it's the court's job, to carve out a right to privacy that isn't that wasn't contemplated the framers and isn't really enumerated as such in the constitution, celebrated. But let me let me let me let me punch back, and you hear on one element- that's up perfectly fair reading but it comes in a week in which Justice Lana Kagan referred.

To the decision that sad that you can't for someone to make a political contribution to a cause they dont like because there where's of a union describe this as the weapon possession of the first amendment, So, while you're saying that liberal should be upset because Kennedy was a privacy, expand, their general liberal doctrine and Kagan, I think, is thought of as smart, as oh, sir, to centre being closer to the centre than than most of the other liberal justices now refers without any irony to the notion that jurisprudence supporting free speech and the primacy of the first amendment is weapon arising as its. I dont think that liberals think that privacy and expansive understanding of individual liberty? Is there it will work anymore

yeah. I have to add that there is no coherent legal philosophy the liberal objections to what the next Supreme Court will look like and what it will do with the option of it is the exercise of raw political power and I'll site Jeff Tube in here who has been losing his mind very unbecoming fashion. Over the last couple of days, saying quote clearly the next gunboat that the next to us or it will do the following: quote: abortion illegal doctors, prosecuted gay people barred from restaurants, hotels stores, African Americans out of a lead schools, gun control band and fifty states the end of the regulatory state aids. Point. It is more laws some point. Fewer laws that today the thread, however, is entirely projection. What the left would do with a court that it had entire and complete control The living constitution returns no judicial philosophy beyond activism, his only thinking of you

opposition, as you would what you would do conditions, without any regard for normal precedent or a collegial you know affections and it's really quite unbecoming- on its borders- and as we send the beginning, hysterical. Ok, I just me to say here that, as somebody who worked on the high school paper would Jeff Turban, he all is needed. Editing, So all that being said yap I mean I I, but I think so point I wanted to. I wanted to push back, but I think the point is serious that what what you are being here is this: systematic that that this they are when Abe said that the idea that there was an inevitability- to America's journey left word in the in the direction of cultural liberally

which was something I think that was generally believed. As a matter of fact, in the middle of twenty fifteen, after the in other words, the decision that completely legalised- and you know, a gay marriage and equalize gay marriage with with all their forms, America dad as well as other things, meant that this was just the in which the last vestiges of traditional list life and law, we're going to be swept away and the Trump election the gorse such nine that followed by this, that what they are looking at, as well as their extremely tend to the whole. On political power given all of the losses for democratic politicians during the Obama era and now, during that their pants

and their panicked, with good reason and out ass upon a part of the problem, exists whenever it ability is also that they have lost. The leftist activists have lost touch entirely with the fact that there are sound. And scholarly well, thought is historically based arguments for all the things that that leftist supposed they they have it in. In this serve understanding of ever of their cause as inevitable they they have lost the ability to argue for their cause because because they they don't recognize legitimate arguments I went to law school at a particularly progressive, our school, I went to Northeastern in Boston. There are many others I mean I'd idea. In other words, northeastern was uniquely.

A place in their long known for Progressive ISM down to the point where they dont have grades, because great suggests hierarchy. So they don't traditional graze. They do narrative of evaluations, but it's true in the sense that crime I ask that you always have to find the one token, professor, that he's a little bit libertarian in and the other ones a little bit at at at another institution, there's two in one of its kind of a conservative, catholic and another one that but every all the rest of the faculty, and they all talk the same language and they when cases come up in the professor poses questions the class they all respond. The same way puzzled. If there's the one kid who like wait a second, whereas this right to privacy. I see it in the end and no one had been a kind of London gains to address questions like that. So that the legal Academy for the most an elite kind of legal side is so tilted everything aims

actually right there, they have. They cannot compute the dogs in our lives. Found. Scholarly thoughtful arguments for the positions they re oppose, Therefore they think they are married, Today there are very weak even in this sphere, I remain in addition to the weaknesses at the ballot box level. There are a very weak here. The model thought had softened their minds. So let's talk about aside from the schadenfreude and in the general sense of love, liberal, disconnected less from reality. I didn't foods things like the idea that the that the court should be packed and again, I think interesting- lie with this now. How much floated idea of the court should be packed by by the way by by

senior members of the faculty at the Harvard LAW School, among others, all which seems again to as they did not make it it's all based on the idea that there is a challenge to be the worst possible time to the corporate right they if they win the argument that the court should be packed, laws will be passive to increase than ever supreme. West justices, all of whom will be appointed by Donald Trump Wired advancing this argument. It psychotic and not an argument is an emotional breakdown. As you read this, what I'm saying is observed follow them. Object. This is only a good idea if their age, if they're in charge and they're not ensure Maybe we should keep their mouths shut or they're gonna give Mitch Mcconnell, forgive it emits Bergamo really interesting idea to pursue in the

assuming the Republicans hold the hold the Senate after that's the other funny part about this. Is the there can't be a vote until after the election Mcconnell made that clear with my girl there Campi vote until after the election. All signs point to Republicans holding the Senate this year, like it would take gigantic democratic wave for Democrats, take the Senate this year I mean a gigantic one of the sort that data don't seem to suggest, as is gonna happen, okay. So what and in any case, what would the goal be, then, with the goal, be that if Democrats one the Senate that they would hold open a supreme court see for three years or for two and a half years, because Macao Hold held it up for nine months. Enjoy John. The marshal of the Supreme Court will make model

Our next associate just simply to their ok good point you wanna get into their will. First of all, let's, let's take out you know a backward looking Mcdonald's Gambit Macao gambit was offered. Him March of twenty. Sixteen, when it was by no means clear, the Donald Trump would be the nominee, although is becoming our clear, but when they had committed to it, gambit. They didn't have any idea that Donald Trump was going to win the presidency most likely when it became clear that you would be the nominee they thought they were gonna lose, so they had some cover to vote for Donald Trump Nominal referred for Hilary Clinton's next nominee, However, that would they or even their garland and survived the group, the rebuke of the base, which wouldn't have accepted a vote, the nominee in the election year. Another ratifying they're trying to ratify the Duke is president, albeit by altering it dramatically from went much Mcconnell actually argued, and I think you think That would win both ways, because, even if they lose the Senate, they at least

cover now, for the base to nominate to confer Donald Trump Nominee saying or him her tied and they did everything they possibly could write welfare, and I mean ok, I just the logic there there. There are these weird gaps in logic in the in their response of people who are actually members of the high democratic elite, I'm not talking about sort of grass roots activists to dont care about procedure, and all of that, if they just sound, not then you discover, like you know. These are like you know the, like. I say like the faculty of the Harvard LAW, school Moscow faculty may be very left wing or not or way for, but but that they would be sore pitching totally. Lunatic and associated ideas, political aid

is all of which thought through for five seconds, only right down to the power of the, president who is currently sitting in the oval office with eyes you in a precarious position, Democrats her and their their base is ready to to eat thing alive bright little bee them. Ok! So let right! So! Let's talk about that in relation to the I would say, the hot candidate among the list of twenty five following that his Amy Colony, Barrett former noted Notre Dame LAW School professor and now I don't know which appellate court, but having been confirmed as a nominee last year after some pretty shocking indiscretions of the most elementary forms of respect

religious liberty and personal beliefs has a serious Catholic on the part of them seller, Diane Feinstein, especially but others given her then commit the exorbitant and who is, of course, the number two demo and the Senate. No she's hot rights or she's she's and, as I think Rostov That said this morning, picking her is the best possible way of might appear to own the lives if your trump because she's seems to be the leading edge of the cultural war on the part of of Democrats, so now convince she's part of some weird secret cult that that wants to keep women barefoot than pray

which is an interesting thing to say about somebody who manage to beer fully tenured lot faster and now person on the appeal court, while had left and seven children at the age of forty six years in inaginary barefoot, she's, very barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen I would say, we call me back that really one great waited disk someone with a rather may in identity, terms that the left hates nothing more than someone for may cherished sort of identity group who doesn't. Oh along with be prescribed identity. Politics of that group. That's that's that's the greatest offence to God, Clarence Right systems well end and Miguel astronomy

was the first thing s case, and that was my yellow Strada upon a point appointed to an appeal court and basically blocked and enforced to eventually forced to give up. Has been for the seat on the grounds that if he were given the civil political court appointment, he would therefore eventually become the first Latino Supreme Court Justice that would be really bad for Democrats. So he to be blocked from a lower court appointment for which he was eminently qualified without any question simply differ. Send him from being name to the higher court because he was wrong because because he was not part the homo genius ethnic liberal American, his back right thing. It's kind of worth

going in to what it was when, when she was up for her appellate, see Amy cotton coming Barrett a job, as John said, came under severe attack were Durban said you know, I am a catholic Butts describe to you as an Orthodox Catholic, a small o Orthodox Catholic and when what is that are you? Do you think you're more Catholics and the only father and stuff like that and basic she said. No, I don't. I love the Holy Father above a block which the reared line of questioning, and then nay another way, a camera with this, they had ever say her name Senator from Hawaii also said your every year: religious views, a scary in so many words, but most This line came from Diane Feinstein, who said the dog. Unless loudly within you and that's a problem,

Obviously, that line among conservative Catholics from written in a different Ross to everyone else became the sensational. There are cups and teachers that say that dug the dogma lives loudly within you because which conservative Catholic doesn't like to hear those words, but the they were referring to again, maybe because it is so important to delve into the details of these things what is it would a specious arguments it was. Was she had written a long Laura View article was acting. She had coordinate with John Garthie, who is now the present, the classic. The America where she argued that you know how should Catholics deal with care? is that touch squarely on church teaching, She brought up the death penalty as an example, and she said the conclusion of the essay was the Catholics should quote not use.

In other words seeds on there under the APOLLO bench, to impose the churches teaching you know the rest of the country. They should use rate legal reason and, if need be, is very difficult for them, as in death penalty cases, where the church deems that the death penalty. Surely you know impermissible in in us tuition other, although has never quite rule that out and in those cases they should use the refusal rules and then the whole point of the article was too you know What is the discernment process from forecasts? A judge to use that D refusal rose to pull themselves herself for himself out of a case that was and they re literally twisted their argument around and made it sound like. She was saying that if for a Catholic on the bench, you should use the court at every instance, two x, but certainly pursue. Your sort of religious aims at

I wrote an open about the time for the times the Ella Times even than others took issue with sad, but. You you'll see again this line of argument. I think, come up because the all they have to pin on her as this one article and it says, Quote- don't imposed church teachings through the bench although I have to say that their that argument, if you really follow. You wanna take seriously behind? I think she ll archly, sad disowned it in her remarks today, was that yet and when you are deeply held personal beliefs, conflict with, in all cases, after here you might want to consider using were cues all that this is not something that aid, Supreme Court. Someone who goes on the Supreme Court, who is gonna, find find it necessarily refuse herself in incredibly difficult moments.

You know incredibly difficult juridical moments. That's not the greatest way to testify about how you gonna, before as a judge yeah, I wouldn't where I hope she had been had now having or relate. I worry that didn't work right. I worry Sean's today in the chest where they should become issue. That should be to worry Then, if she rules a certain way, let's say of abortion comes back or some abortion restriction comes back before the bench before the Supreme Court shall be we are sensitive to how she is perceived as a very public, conservative, Catholic and Bob about an end. Ass doesn't rule, as I think she showed Every other would ever going right. But this, of course, is the secret of of the horror of the out the the growing politicization of the confirmation process. Is that, while I think it's fair to say that

we'll have used the general had used in the last forty years. The general proposition that a person nominated for the court in order to preserve the separation of powers should knots He could generally to how they work rule theoretically on a specific issue right particularly on abortion, and yet we got to the ludicrous point here that you now David suitor claim but he had never had a conversation in his life about abortion or even thought about it. You said he hadn't thought about it. There was like we're. Really you never know. I've never thought about it. I haven't really had, that's about it, I don't really think about him- have really thought about it, of course, as it turned out, he ended up being a being approved.

And then turned out as they concern as appointee of a conservative administration to be a liberal right. So so there are interesting problems with this, and yet, on the other hand, you can see how danger It is that a person who it was who is getting a lifetime appointment on matters that are supposed to be completely divorced from practical in contemporary politics, which is why we have left the importance of the Supreme Court now finds it necessary to jump through oops proven themselves to be politically sound. To their own side were significantly politically provocative to the other side that there are great Let me like I'd whether going in and also the item, you put your finger on it to the extent that any anywhere was persecuted by the Democrats sewers.

They're getting her, and that has made her household name and on social conservatives, but its both row is both the right and the left that are making road the centre of this little betting process that they have going on in these and these Tang circles in which they are engaged in to the exclusion every other judicial philosophy. That is much more valuable. I mean it's not as the roman case, you're gonna be the only things that this court might litigate, we haven't talked anything the living constitution judicial activism. Original is an intellectual is on the things that will be that will be the centrepiece of the republic and efforts to better our him run like me We are always talking about these theoretical cultural debates, sort of almost wish casting the cultural final battle. They rang Iraq of cultural conservatism. First finally come. It is to me of arrogance. Sailors were a conversation because I don't I don't see that really happening well, I guess

The question is whether we know enough now, after by four forty five, forty six forty five years after row. I do know that somebody who feels ex way about row probably feel This is why we see a b c d and e weighs about those issues that that there is a very much a correlation between thinking that role was wrongly decided in its effects. Mention of ideas. Appear nowhere in the constitution but are said to be congruity had with ideas in the constitution that We know enough to know that somebody who thinks exe about row. All right somewhat. Ringlets problem was that it derives from the fort amendment things that obviously the framers of the fourteenth amendment wouldn't have appeared, That's generally right, I guess

as although I mean that I think the general sense was that Blackburn's decision found said that their this wasn't to be found in the council. Solution, but that the penumbra per number An emanation from the constitution meant that there was this right to privacy that extended as far as the woman Bobby you know in in all cases, and then Kennedy found that there was mystery to existence that could not be resolved compiled by the state? Reversing it by the state right. So solemn saying is that I just the interesting thing like how do we know like yours at here, something so that these last this is we're five, four the last three or four decisions and that the controversial decisions, border security.

Unions, the yes accept my travel ban except masterpiece rights. If the masterpiece catch up? Ok, so this is sign that the idiot logical lines have hardened, because there was a time in which you could see a list. Real justice, finding that the National Security ACT of nineteen fifty two gave the president powers to enforce. The immigration laws as he saw fit, that would have been a big stretch. I'll take a quick decision was seven to right. That's what that's! What sort of just settle, though seven too and we're dead, weird ways right, because it was seven. Two, because the body that enforced,

ruling against the regular cake shop was so extremely anti christian right, but not in general on the proposition you can't force somebody to do whatever you can for somebody to to create creative work celebrating something with which they disagree? That was not seven to read. That was five. For, but I'm saying there was a time when you can imagine a liberal could find acts just as there was time you can imagine The conservative, even like Kennedy might find why, even though people at storm others revile Kennedy for a lot of what he found, but I don't think that's true going forward.

Because I think the ideological lines in jurisprudential thinking have hardened over the last twenty five thirty years, but by that you made that therefore all? These justices are necessarily more activist on both sides going forward. I mean they're, not activist. Let me put it this way. Everyone was thrilled with Gorse it's right. This is great trouble. Pointed corset. How grain is courses eloquent? Nobody knew the first thing about Gorse Ich. Are these. The conservatives knew anything about courses for all they knew. Gorse judge could find tomorrow that you know I don't know whatever course, which could have been suitor We are not here. He had written any of those happy well, there are lots of people who said trumpets them, so you must be good, but I think there were people because he did have a kind of intellectual record he'd written a book about it is that suicide and euthanasia then

and a window into his world view where he sees the should have unleashed It did expansion of autonomy under the auspices the privacy or the right to determine the mystery of life. Self blah blah. I dont think Sean Hannity really sat down red gorse judges. Book isolated I think those yours potentially he's really great, I'm just like they knew they know, people now understand the battle lines are drawn and that conservative justices are general, really gonna. Think much down the line, the way they think they're gonna think and that, therefore he could have appointed a balloon to the Supreme Court. Then they would have said this is the greatest who never, if not firm, get out but but balloon. Having generally that Israel, but if you're a federalist society embedded justice, you believe certain things, that's just here,

appealing to authority there, but with some understanding of what that authority grants Obviously, I am not necessarily because even within the sort of Euro Federalists, society constellation or orbit. There are these important differences, which is why I don't see how No, if someone has said point of view about row or Casey. Therefore, you can deduce much else about their judicial philosophy, so example. Do you oppose row because you think that it's such a question of the kind of profound moral importance that it shouldn't be left to court to decide who should be left out, due to the various states or the people are what have you at the ballot box? In which case would you be? Kay with abortion. If it were, You know the ratified at the ballot box. On the other hand, you oppose it because you think there's a

the right to life imbedded in fetal person, hood therefore even a majority you know couldn't infringe upon that. That's another kind of conservative point of view. That's different sides, Abraham just just to clarify certain those agreeing with you that the federal society does a series of questions and at all about rolling. They all point to a particular philosophy that you now is the conservative. Originally sexual is but look just for I go to them before I go to the break in the ad. I'd want to make the point that in general in the United States. About lines are drawn. Who was the most pro life Senator in the U S, Senate, in the nineteen eighties deal with the most arguable, the most pro life centre. In the U S, I wasn't nineteen at TED Kennedy so

Kennedy was down the line pro lifer you now, including you know, all all the way whether Believe Edward. I don't believe you believe anything, but I'm just saying that you know were, and there were plenty of projects place, including the guy who in who came up with the job This idea of appointing David's Supreme Court senator from New Hampshire, whose name, even as I am speaking, Rodman Warren Redman, whose idea was that Johnson Susi should suggest that serbian some important projects republican, I dont, know that there is a binding except for like Collins and Mc Caskey? I'm not sure there is a pro life republican left in the who s side and then there may not be many pro life. Begins at all in the house,

I remember there a democrat pro life now and say nap approach, pro choice, approach or husbands, applicants in the house, If they're, if there are more than ten, our ten? If there are more than ten, that would be a startling. Thirty years ago there were certain third thirty to forty percent of the Republicans in a house where some form approach choice Anyway, so what else are you gonna, say I'll? Here's what I was going to say. I wanted to talk to you guys about lending club. If I could cause for decades. Credit cards have been telling us I am now and pay for it later with interest, despite your best intentions, that interests can get out of control fast, with less club. You can consolidate you're, dead or path credit cards with one fixed monthly payments, since two thousand seven Lenin Club,

help millions of people regain control their finances with affordable, fixed rate, personal loans, no trips to a bank, no high interest, credit cards, just gotta lending club, can't tell them by yourself and how much you want to borrow pick the terms at a right for you and if you were approved your lot automatically deposited into your bank account in as little as a few days lending club as the number one peer to peer lending platform of those thirty, five billion in loans issued got away, in them club dotcom, lashed commentary check great minutes and by up to forty thousand dollars, that's lending clubbed outcomes, less commentary lending clubbed outcome slashed. Monetary all loans made by web bank member if the icy equal housing lender So we have the Democratic Party increase in numbers of grass roots people in the Democratic party.

And now reaching as high as Senator Kristen Jailer Brand of New York State thought of as a serious contender potentially for the trip twenty democratic presidential nomination who are now all calling for the abolition of ice the immigration, immigration and customs enforcement agency that is partly depart of homeland security. Part of the reorganization in two thousand to of the federal government, they one of their successor agencies to the migration, the Naturalisation service which was divided into ice and two other rights are right now to other agencies, a customs and border protection agency. With police at the border and various border elements, ports, and what have you and also the other cities that citizen alsatian?

animalization ART, which is all about creating new citizens naturalizing into american society, right? Ok, so demo, Let's have now embrace the national greasing numbers of now liberals, leftist organizations, activists under the hashtag, the twitter, hashtag, abolish ice and my question now I it is hard to get as daffish on the right, as I am, I am as close to being an immigration, dove, absolutist immigration dove, as you could practically find on the right, and I think that this is the craziest and most demented political move that the Democratic Party going

into a mid term. Elections could possibly be making not the Democratic Party, but the left. Can anyone make a case for why this is politically smile policy wise, smart or in the same, in any understanding of the word saying so now, but I was so conceding that it is insane the product of a mass delusion that has, by the way, that the left has retrofitted existing grievance with ice and Foresman of american immigration laws generally. Aren't you the problem with what happened at the border, because the separation of parents and families, order is seen. Bp not ice, nothing to do with ice there, just really mad about existing problems, and so that they have this

existing agreements with isolate imposed on ice? That being said, there's a lot of problems without this agency operates as agency, as you said, is fifteen years old, and in that time this what was supposed to be an investigative mechanism or the ages became. A law enforcement mechanism has been holding Congress on multiple occasions for executing warrants are warrant was raids and arrests without the proper documentation without proper pre approval, from a judge in the face of Iraq or see that has adopted law enforcement powers. That has a remit that have sprawled well beyond. What was established by Congress and Democrats want to get on board with you know chop it open and scaling back agencies that have expanded beyond the remit federal bureaucracies, applicants. But it would allow me, I don't understand why we wouldn't embraced that, with the exception of the fact that it is politically beneficial for the public and Starkey the Democrats or softened. The border and Democrats will been very red reluctant to embrace this base message.

Mozart, democratic leadership, appear to and know that right I wish that that was the argument that they were making. In other words, I wish they had this sophisticated argument laid out, which I grant you for the sake of argument. I haven't really. I am not an expert on ice, but that that that day, reach beyond the remit that their Gunderson that fine, but I think I think that the above ice message in its simplicity in simple mindedness and The anger behind it that base activists left his anger behind. It is just a. Proxy message for abolish border. No human being is illegal. Why can't wait? We do away with a nation state, I mean they don't think it. We don't know not every guy on in you know who is protesting in Columbus Circle or however, they were over. The weekend

there's a democratic socialist that America uprising resistance. Whatever not everyone thinks about it in these sophisticated terms, but that's what it is. It's a cultural power see if it were really an argument about policy wouldn't be abolished. She would say investigate eyes, Ray eyes, but I think abolish really sends that kind of cultural proxy message that they will want. San Georgia has for a long time that the parallel on the right is polish the IRA's which, by the way, Republicans control every branch of federal Govern Last time you heard anybody talk about abolishing the higher, as is the case I knew. Also the IRS. What was, I think, a better populist message that abolishing ice, because every single personally I'd states has to pay taxes and fight, with the IRS and is annoyed by it on the fifteenth of April or whenever and feels there being gouged, and so the idea that you could say to be old, weak, buddhas empower- and

he will Willoughby I wish, the IRS the number of people in the United States who? have anything to do. With ice or Will ever you know, interact with ice is vanish vanishing small admitted cedar, probably to three percent of the poor, population at most So either there. It doesn't have the kick that abolish the IRS add. You know, kick their ok go ahead. Sorry, my question is what, activists. Fringe left activists message cannot eventually make its way to the democratic establishment We see it over and over again. I think I think that's you know it gets a lot more attention when, when it happen, on the republic inside, but these

it, has become mainstreaming server minds we of graffiti I've, seen on the sidewalk and in lower Manhattan, its is abolished. Prison is that have a shot in the future five ten years down the line you know I will, I would have been so the already there I'm upset Abkhazia quartet is, is a member of the democratic Socialist of America has abolished businesses of benefits right, but but here let's talk about this, so From said on, marine barter almost show on the Fox Business Channel he really hopes Democrats spend the summer. Ok about abolishing eyes, because it will mean, as he said, Durham France will never win another election and you can like or hate trump as much as you like, but

this is not at all. I think an irrational. Well, thereby saying is there's a problem here, yet so here's the trajectory Democrats in a leadership say. Yes, abolish eyes. We don't think that's great the girl will investigate that very tentative in careful don't want to alienate the base the democratic primaries over the course of twenty five competition is the more specific advocacy for the Adele Polish made of ice. Republicans spend the summer of twenty twenty congratulating themselves, preemptively on winning re election, because nobody would ever vote in a candidate with such a radical free aggressive left wing views and then all of a sudden something happens and they managed to getting a candidate who promised and pledged to abolish ice now. Do the apologizes president, probably not, but we ve seen this moving

We know it can happen. We know that the american public doesn't necessarily reject the policy. Our president, based on one policy prescription that is perhaps a little too radical for the centre abbot. Well, ok, fair no Muslim data, but that would be there's no deportation force abuse, whether things that help went down from the Brenner right! Ok! So once again, I am not entirely sure that I understand what you're Oh you're, saying that this measure does not prohibit Amy. They might when intellectual again correct. Even saying: abolish version. The open borders and donations Dayton. We should apologise because a the public, the voting public, will make a broader decision based on the myriad of the spectrum of policies, became the dollars and be a less than this after them. Ok, so let's move on to it so you're going to do.

It's twenty! Let's just go to twenty eighteen, okay, so the as as the elections of twenty eighteen gets, Oh, Sir Democrats retain in all poles a a small but significant edge in Web party, you know surgeon the generic ballot. That says we vote for Democratic Republican in November. They were in a small but serious edge enthusiasm and all the evidence of special election suggests greater democratic enthusiasm. But it's not great. Like it's not over. There they're not running away with it right. That seems very clear. So the edges five or six points they Emily! Its thought needs to be seven on the generic ballot to win control of the house.

That will not be anywhere sufficient to win control centre, which will probably have to be over ten percent, generic ballot and at least but generally speaking, all things being equal if they don't screw it up there going in to November. They should be in a spirit of some optimism. Raising the possibility that there should be a fight over the abolition of a law enforcement agency that deals with illegal immigrants would seem to be suicide. Luck because it will look at that's all I'm saying twenty twenty, Future, where we might well not you're a hundred percent right weeks ago, when the whole trump separating families in the border regions, who was sprung up. We'd said: ok, how're you! How are the Democrats overplayed her hand, Howard to go too far, are they gonna go too far? Are they gonna blow this one? This is how you blow this one

this is a massive mistake. I don't think I agree with that and I think every everybody disagrees with that. Then in a presidential Cato in a year in which the whole you will write of senators up, but I'm just saying canopy this easy. It can't be the seas. For the Republicans to retain the house, because Democrats have a nervous breakdown over something that is, that is demented like that. That would speak to a crisis in the demo. A party at a self destructive, miss in the Democratic Party that I'm not sure that I. You know only I don't know where a bill Mitchell could think that it could be this easy, so I figure they'll

some kind of a pull back. I don't know how and when there is no there's a leader of the Democratic Party to pull back, but it just. It can't be this. I hate to be there I hereby think we're getting way over escape. This is exactly why the Republicans exactly with Democrats, that of our Republican all those years over political racking, I've election victory after election victory, perhaps not because of what they believe in brass, despite it was no obstacle to them succeeding at the ballot box. Maybe this is a bridge too far but I don't think we know that yet and watches because get it done in order to see the acceptable level of leftism, which is terrible. Ok, I dont think its voters. I think the whole question here goes to when you're time at a mid term election you're talking about an electorate that is forty percent smaller than a presidential light, so that what matters is turn out, enthusiasm

getting your people out to vote, and the thing is that for Trump fans trumps, on the ballot, just as Obama wasn't on the ballot internal, fourteen for Obama fans and they just didn't go. I mean you know their way more democratic voters, two thousand and eight and two thousand twelve than there were republican voters in their way more republican voters in two thousand ten, two thousand fourteen then there were democratic voters right so often you need, in this case, is for Democrats to turn out the way, Republicans did in the mid terms, and Republicans rather, we Democrats did the midterms for Democrats to perform triumphantly in twenty eighteen. But if you give Republic, if you say look if you guys let this happen like we ve been saying, we thought it was the trumpet go and safe you guys, let this happen, I'm gonna be impeached and that could like generate the vote, but this is much more basic, like

These guys are trying to get into office in order to abolish the law enforcement agency that seeks to deport criminal illegal aliens. You better get out to the polls and vote. That's it. That's pretty good! That's a pretty good international nationalizing. The mid terms issue for firm, the right that doesn't have one yet and it's not take as trumpet is generated. Its being handed to the right or the left right, which is why, as I say, I feel like it somehow can't it can't. It can happen like this. I just I just can't believe I'm ok, so we only have a couple more minutes. Somebody needs to react to this story. And we see put out last night that the North Korea, Is our producing more nuclear fissile material? According to our intelligence agencies.

And whether this is going to interrupt the really one, careful concord between Trump and Kim similarly, as we hadn t yet another summit with another, really wonderful, untrustworthy american ally, Vladimir Putin, Anybody have any thought here, he's just very quick he's being played. We predicted it on the package on the block Noah special yeah I'll, do a little- I told you so be done so compares headed over there this week to do stuff that we should have been doing before the summit with the summit should have never happened without any this. In our thinking, declaration about the extent to which they have this parameter, there's stuff what they disclose. What have you and arrive at New York Times a story today this morning that said,

quoting an unnamed official in other North Koreans better disclose this one very secret. Cia, yes said of cascading centrifuges, because if they don't disclose this place with this location that we've known about it for a year hold deals going to call up come up. Come apart. That to me is really worrying. That suggests to me that the audience here is domestic that, we want to get on North Korea on the record. We're gonna walk them through this, so that we can guide the Senate in through the process ratification whenever we have some documentation here and make everything and make everything look good for the Americans for the american audience and western audience, and which has nothing to do with addressing the threat, which will be there until address it militarily. At this rate, the eye I grew, No, because what what's this current means you have pump pale and John Bolton both proceed, with this, as if the story about the the bid, then the new who enrichment build up, isn't happening there. There are sort of

the demonstration is operating on a separate track from from from these breaking stories on their the sort of coming up with various timetables schemes according to which came it's to stop producing fuel and then ultimately declare what he has and then ultimately and end as weapons programme altogether. I hope I may well that's always nice to end on a piece of a happy. The Good NEWS. So this brings us to the end of the spot. Gasped, enjoy plea, have a wonderful fourth of July, and Indeed, our founding documents allowed to your children so that they should not think that this when the time is the only moment didn't talk him american history and we will be back to and on so for debate,

nor Rossman absorb Amorium. John put words: keep the candle burning.